FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 04-13-2010, 12:04 PM
Allan McRae
 
Default coreutils 8.4-3

This changes /usr/bin/[ from a symlink to /usr/bin/test to the actual
binary provided upstream. The use of the symlink has been in Arch for
ages (probably for ever), but I can not see what this change will
break. Having the symlink does break some stuff (FS#19063). Note
that Fedora moved from the symlink to the binary for "[" in 2004.


Signoff both,
Allan
 
Old 04-13-2010, 12:11 PM
Andrea Scarpino
 
Default coreutils 8.4-3

On Tuesday 13 April 2010 14:04:44 Allan McRae wrote:
> This changes /usr/bin/[ from a symlink to /usr/bin/test to the actual
> binary provided upstream. The use of the symlink has been in Arch for
> ages (probably for ever), but I can not see what this change will
> break. Having the symlink does break some stuff (FS#19063). Note
> that Fedora moved from the symlink to the binary for "[" in 2004.
>
> Signoff both,
> Allan
signoff x86_64

--
Andrea | deelab.org/bash
 
Old 04-14-2010, 04:42 PM
Dieter Plaetinck
 
Default coreutils 8.4-3

On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 14:11:43 +0200
Andrea Scarpino <andrea@archlinux.org> wrote:

> On Tuesday 13 April 2010 14:04:44 Allan McRae wrote:
> > This changes /usr/bin/[ from a symlink to /usr/bin/test to the
> > actual binary provided upstream. The use of the symlink has been
> > in Arch for ages (probably for ever), but I can not see what this
> > change will break. Having the symlink does break some stuff
> > (FS#19063). Note that Fedora moved from the symlink to the binary
> > for "[" in 2004.
> >
> > Signoff both,
> > Allan
> signoff x86_64
>

so what exactly does the binary do? is it an exact copy
of /usr/bin/test, is it a small program that does exec(), or .. ?
I downloaded the 8.4 tarball but couldn't quickly find the answer.

Dieter
 
Old 04-14-2010, 05:40 PM
Thomas Bächler
 
Default coreutils 8.4-3

Am 14.04.2010 18:42, schrieb Dieter Plaetinck:
>> On Tuesday 13 April 2010 14:04:44 Allan McRae wrote:
>>> This changes /usr/bin/[ from a symlink to /usr/bin/test to the
>>> actual binary provided upstream. The use of the symlink has been
>>> in Arch for ages (probably for ever), but I can not see what this
>>> change will break. Having the symlink does break some stuff
>>> (FS#19063). Note that Fedora moved from the symlink to the binary
>>> for "[" in 2004.
>
> so what exactly does the binary do? is it an exact copy
> of /usr/bin/test, is it a small program that does exec(), or .. ?
> I downloaded the 8.4 tarball but couldn't quickly find the answer.

I don't think it matters. Neither [ nor test from coreutils are actually
ever used - the bash (or whatever shell you use) builtins [ and test are
used instead.
 
Old 04-14-2010, 11:28 PM
Allan McRae
 
Default coreutils 8.4-3

On 15/04/10 03:40, Thomas Bächler wrote:

Am 14.04.2010 18:42, schrieb Dieter Plaetinck:

On Tuesday 13 April 2010 14:04:44 Allan McRae wrote:

This changes /usr/bin/[ from a symlink to /usr/bin/test to the
actual binary provided upstream. The use of the symlink has been
in Arch for ages (probably for ever), but I can not see what this
change will break. Having the symlink does break some stuff
(FS#19063). Note that Fedora moved from the symlink to the binary
for "[" in 2004.


so what exactly does the binary do? is it an exact copy
of /usr/bin/test, is it a small program that does exec(), or .. ?
I downloaded the 8.4 tarball but couldn't quickly find the answer.


I don't think it matters. Neither [ nor test from coreutils are actually
ever used - the bash (or whatever shell you use) builtins [ and test are
used instead.



In general, this is the only real difference:
NOTE: [ honors the --help and --version options, but test does not.
test treats each of those as it treats any other nonempty STRING.

The rest I think is better compatibility with test synatx when your
shell does not provide "[".


Anyway, we should be supplying what upstream installs.

Allan
 
Old 04-15-2010, 07:10 AM
Dieter Plaetinck
 
Default coreutils 8.4-3

On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 09:28:04 +1000
Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org> wrote:

> On 15/04/10 03:40, Thomas Bächler wrote:
> > Am 14.04.2010 18:42, schrieb Dieter Plaetinck:
> >>> On Tuesday 13 April 2010 14:04:44 Allan McRae wrote:
> >>>> This changes /usr/bin/[ from a symlink to /usr/bin/test to the
> >>>> actual binary provided upstream. The use of the symlink has
> >>>> been in Arch for ages (probably for ever), but I can not see
> >>>> what this change will break. Having the symlink does break
> >>>> some stuff (FS#19063). Note that Fedora moved from the symlink
> >>>> to the binary for "[" in 2004.
> >>
> >> so what exactly does the binary do? is it an exact copy
> >> of /usr/bin/test, is it a small program that does exec(), or .. ?
> >> I downloaded the 8.4 tarball but couldn't quickly find the answer.
> >
> > I don't think it matters. Neither [ nor test from coreutils are
> > actually ever used - the bash (or whatever shell you use) builtins
> > [ and test are used instead.
> >
>
> In general, this is the only real difference:
> NOTE: [ honors the --help and --version options, but test does not.
> test treats each of those as it treats any other nonempty STRING.
>
> The rest I think is better compatibility with test synatx when your
> shell does not provide "[".
>
> Anyway, we should be supplying what upstream installs.

I asked it just out of curiosity. I agree we should stick to
upstream.

Dieter
 
Old 04-15-2010, 10:04 AM
Allan McRae
 
Default coreutils 8.4-3

On 15/04/10 17:10, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:

On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 09:28:04 +1000
Allan McRae<allan@archlinux.org> wrote:


On 15/04/10 03:40, Thomas Bächler wrote:

Am 14.04.2010 18:42, schrieb Dieter Plaetinck:

On Tuesday 13 April 2010 14:04:44 Allan McRae wrote:

This changes /usr/bin/[ from a symlink to /usr/bin/test to the
actual binary provided upstream. The use of the symlink has
been in Arch for ages (probably for ever), but I can not see
what this change will break. Having the symlink does break
some stuff (FS#19063). Note that Fedora moved from the symlink
to the binary for "[" in 2004.


so what exactly does the binary do? is it an exact copy
of /usr/bin/test, is it a small program that does exec(), or .. ?
I downloaded the 8.4 tarball but couldn't quickly find the answer.


I don't think it matters. Neither [ nor test from coreutils are
actually ever used - the bash (or whatever shell you use) builtins
[ and test are used instead.



In general, this is the only real difference:
NOTE: [ honors the --help and --version options, but test does not.
test treats each of those as it treats any other nonempty STRING.

The rest I think is better compatibility with test synatx when your
shell does not provide "[".

Anyway, we should be supplying what upstream installs.


I asked it just out of curiosity. I agree we should stick to
upstream.



Anyway.... can I now have an i686 signoff? :P
 
Old 04-24-2010, 07:12 AM
Allan McRae
 
Default coreutils 8.4-3

On 15/04/10 20:04, Allan McRae wrote:

On 15/04/10 17:10, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:

On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 09:28:04 +1000
Allan McRae<allan@archlinux.org> wrote:


On 15/04/10 03:40, Thomas Bächler wrote:

Am 14.04.2010 18:42, schrieb Dieter Plaetinck:

On Tuesday 13 April 2010 14:04:44 Allan McRae wrote:

This changes /usr/bin/[ from a symlink to /usr/bin/test to the
actual binary provided upstream. The use of the symlink has
been in Arch for ages (probably for ever), but I can not see
what this change will break. Having the symlink does break
some stuff (FS#19063). Note that Fedora moved from the symlink
to the binary for "[" in 2004.


so what exactly does the binary do? is it an exact copy
of /usr/bin/test, is it a small program that does exec(), or .. ?
I downloaded the 8.4 tarball but couldn't quickly find the answer.


I don't think it matters. Neither [ nor test from coreutils are
actually ever used - the bash (or whatever shell you use) builtins
[ and test are used instead.



In general, this is the only real difference:
NOTE: [ honors the --help and --version options, but test does not.
test treats each of those as it treats any other nonempty STRING.

The rest I think is better compatibility with test synatx when your
shell does not provide "[".

Anyway, we should be supplying what upstream installs.


I asked it just out of curiosity. I agree we should stick to
upstream.



Anyway.... can I now have an i686 signoff? :P


This has taken so long the package is now out of date... I am moving it.

Allan
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 02:01 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org